Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds useful behavioral context by emphasizing the tool only covers a curated set (not all of FRED) and returns historical observations. No contradictions with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three sentences and front-loaded with the primary purpose. Each sentence adds essential information: what it does, examples, and scope limitation with a pointer to SearchEconomicIndicators. No filler or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 4 parameters, no output schema, and annotations, the description provides key context: historical observations, a curated series set, and where to search for more. However, it does not describe the return format or observation frequency, which would be helpful since there is no output schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already documents all parameters with 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing concrete example series IDs (FEDFUNDS, CPIAUCSL, UNRATE, etc.) and noting that seriesId accepts standard indicator names in addition to FRED IDs, enriching the schema's description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description uses a specific verb ('Get time series data') and identifies the unique resource (FRED economic indicators). It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings by noting this covers only a curated ~40-series set, not the full FRED catalog.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit context on when to use this tool: for historical time series of specific FRED indicators. It explicitly names SearchEconomicIndicators as the alternative to discover available series, and clarifies the curated scope, helping the agent choose correctly.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.